Jump to content



Photo

Would it be better for the line if…?


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,895 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 07:06 AM

One of the current issues that my friends have discussed is that there are going to be three game lines each covering a slice of the universe. If it's like the WH40K games, then each game line is going to be getting support products. That's great, but what if they made the three core books come out first and only started putting out supplements for each line after that. They might be able to compress the time between them that way, and it would open up the whole setting.


Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#2 korjik

korjik

    Member

  • Members
  • 306 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:23 AM

Interesting, but I dont know if it would work. I am assuming that alot of the time between the main products is going to be taken up with rules creation and playtesting, but that alot of the supplement book development is in fluff more than rules. Given that the Star Wars fluff is to a large degree prewritten, and only needs to be translated into the current system, I think that supplement books could be produced much more quickly, and that it would not save any production time if they left them out.



#3 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,895 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 09:53 AM

It concerns me to think that the rules system will be 'evolving' from one rulebook to the next in the way that the WH40K lines have done. This will create difficulties with compatibility if it happens. I sincerely hope that the base system is locked in stone once the first core rulebook is in print. The other two can simply reprint them while placing new species, new gear, new professions and trees - things which add to the base without altering it.


Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#4 Cyril

Cyril

    Member

  • Members
  • 172 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:14 PM

HappyDaze said:

It concerns me to think that the rules system will be 'evolving' from one rulebook to the next in the way that the WH40K lines have done. This will create difficulties with compatibility if it happens. I sincerely hope that the base system is locked in stone once the first core rulebook is in print. The other two can simply reprint them while placing new species, new gear, new professions and trees - things which add to the base without altering it.

Evolving the system doesn't mean rewriting the system. Look at Saga Edition as a perfect example. They learned a helluva lot through the design of that game, to the point where the game naturally evolved to become tighter and more streamlined. New options were added that conformed to the base system, but added new layers of complexity should you desire them,and added new options to the existing game.

The game "grew" and "evolved" but it didn't change. It got more streamlined. It got more robust. It got "better."



#5 HappyDaze

HappyDaze

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,895 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 01:54 PM

Cyril said:

The game "grew" and "evolved" but it didn't change. It got more streamlined. It got more robust. It got "better."

 

We're talking about FFG here, so let's look at what they did with the WH40K lines. Compare using the powers of DH psykers to OW psykers and then try to tell me the game didn't change with a straight face. If, for example, similar changes (we now agree that they are changes, right?) happen in the Force rules between EotE and FaD, then the games are not going to be fully compatible with one another, and that's not going to be 'better' in my eyes.


Ignore, Ignore, you must learn Ignore!

 

Now Ignoring: Nobody.


#6 Cyril

Cyril

    Member

  • Members
  • 172 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 02:12 PM

HappyDaze said:

Cyril said:

The game "grew" and "evolved" but it didn't change. It got more streamlined. It got more robust. It got "better."

 

We're talking about FFG here, so let's look at what they did with the WH40K lines. Compare using the powers of DH psykers to OW psykers and then try to tell me the game didn't change with a straight face. If, for example, similar changes (we now agree that they are changes, right?) happen in the Force rules between EotE and FaD, then the games are not going to be fully compatible with one another, and that's not going to be 'better' in my eyes.

You're making the mistake of assuming that because they did it with the 40K line, the same thing is going to happen with their Star Wars line. I can't speak to anything concerning their 40K line. I've never played it, and I'm not interested in playing it. It's not because of how they handled the system, the universe just doesn't do anything for me. This is also a different team of designers from their 40K line.

Don't be so quick to judge their future products based on their past products. They're a company. They can learn from their past design decisions and evolve as much as their game systems can.



#7 Gelion

Gelion

    Member

  • Members
  • 18 posts

Posted 18 September 2012 - 04:04 PM

 On 40K, I also haven't played it, but from what I've read, they didn't even develop the original system for it.  What was it, Black Library, GW's own publishing house, that started the 40K RPG?  So, FFG didn't get to design the core system, but they did create a lot of new and different systems for it.  I really can't speak to how deep the original core system may have been with 40K, but seeing how closely EotE's system resembles WHFRP, I think they've got their core figured out.  I think, and I'm only speculating, that anything radically different we might see in future books will be peripheral rules, not fundamental changes to the core.

But that's just my opinion.


Mos Eisley Radio - Your source for Star Wars gaming news, reviews, and commentary





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS